Surgeons Try Cold Cutting for Critically Injured

A clinical trial tests whether induced hypothermia can allow surgeons to save critically wounded patients who would not survive surgery at normal temperatures. Erika Beras reports

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


On rare occasions, a swimmer can survive a near-drowning because cold water has protected their brains—even if they were submerged for up to an hour. Now a clinical trial is testing whether extreme cold can save critically injured gunshot and knife wound patients.

It’s called the Emergency Preservation and Resuscitation for Cardiac Arrest from Trauma Study. Lead Surgeon Sam Tisherman at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center explains that patients are not declared dead, but:

“They’d be close. They’re in cardiac arrest and certainly if we can’t get a pulse back they’d be dead. But we’re not waiting to the point where the surgeons would declare them dead. We’re trying to do this right before this, and find the best window of opportunity where our standard of care hasn’t worked but it’s not too late to try something new.”

Surgeons will cool the patients’ bodies to 50 degrees by pumping dozens of liters of cold saline into the heart. This induced hypothermia nearly halts all activity in the body and brain.

By freezing patients, the surgeons will also freeze time—giving them the opportunity to repair wounds a warm patient wouldn’t typically survive. Should the procedure prove effective, it could give a new meaning to the phrase “cold comfort.”

—Erika Beras

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe